The Fly is my favorite Cronenberg and my favorite "body horror" even above the Thing. It just hits the perfect blend of ridiculous, disgusting, fun, uncannily creepy, campy, and artistic to be the perfect 80s horror movie. On the topic of remakes, I absolutely adore both the Murnau, and especially the Herzog almost shot for shot remake of Nosferatu. Such great films
Agreed, the Murnau film is incredible. It's been a while since I watched Herzog's version, but I remember it didn't have the same impact because I couldn't stop comparing it with the original!
@@michaelbartlettfilm Herzog is my favorite director and I saw that one first so I had the experience of comparing the 1922 version to his, which held up considering its 100 year age
Yikes! How did I miss this video when it dropped? As soon as you mentioned "I am Legend", I was getting ready to put you right with the Vincent Price version. Should have trusted you! Though I do also like "The Omega Man" - I have a soft spot for Charlton Heston's 1970s spate of SF films.
I've always loved the original "The Fly". I saw it in a theatrical revival in 1991 or 1992 and they had a CinemaScope print with the 4-track magnetic stereo audio; what an absolute joy that was to experience. My Blu Ray fits the bill quite well. The Blob is one of those films everyone seems to love but which I find lackluster in some ways. I do like it , but I feel it's overrated. I do enjoy the remake; it's off its head gory but kind of fun its over the top way. "Westworld" from 1973 is a very enjoyable film for me; it has no fat on its slim, 89 minute run time and it just flies by as a rather dated but fond piece of nostalgia.
There's about a two-decade span of the earlier era (stretching from the early Fifties to the early Seventies) being pitted against the latter era, which complicates my thesis that, apart from a handful of exceptions, such as 'Aelita' and 'Metropolis' from the silent years, science fiction cinema experienced a quantum leap beginning in the Sixties. This advancement in merit lies primarily in a greater sophistication in the philosophical issues being addressed, and also more nuanced aesthetic strategies by which to shape and convey those stories and themes. One wouldn't necessarily glean this from looking solely at later remakes of pre-Sixties efforts, the charm of the latter often springing from their datedness and appeals to nostalgia. The remakes might be more technically adroit, but frequently are not as much fun as the originals. In one aspect, the later iterations of 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' are superior to the original, and this is that the alien entities in the later versions are more truly affectless, void of emotion, than the replacements in the first film. This affectlessness makes the invaders more menacing, and makes the situation the human characters confront feel more dire. Generally, though, Siegel's first version is the more memorable effort. I've never seen the remake of 'The Blob', but I did want to observe that the late-night horror screening featured so prominently in the 1958 original could be seen as the prototype of a midnight-movie presentation, the first screen depiction of cult behavior in relation to films and filmgoing. I'm actually a fan of the first couple of seasons of the HBO series 'Westworld', and find it more compelling than the original 1973 film (not to mention the 1976 sequel 'Futureworld'). The cable series admittedly did go on too long, and some story threads needlessly dragged out almost to the point of incoherence, with the altercations between Dolores and Maeve becoming repetitive and predictable. But observe the dazzling temporal leaps the writing and editing make in those first couple of seasons, and the momentous transformations several characters experience as the narrative develops. Though it might seem hyperbolic, I think the temporal dislocations in story and editing are worthy of an Alain Resnais film. One area where I do think the 1973 film is more effective is in the breakdown of the androids (more of a rebellion in the HBO series), the surprise and violence more frightening and unpredictable. In the TV series, this part of the story feels more like a serious glitch for a company swiftly moving in for damage control, while in the original film, the crisis registers as a more existential dilemma, the disaster seeming akin to the end of the world.
Thanks, Barry. Once again, this is so much better argued than my daft little video, ha, ha! 2001: A Space Odyssey influenced sci-fi films for a good decade after its release, and that era was the high-water mark for those people into literary sci-fi who wanted cinema to match it in terms of sophistication (though Omega Man got through somehow!) Then Star Wars turned producers onto space opera and Alien helped reintroduce sci-fi horror, both strains running concurrently through the early to mid-eighties. Kaufman's Body Snatchers remake got in there just before the tide turned, and it's a fantastic movie, but I prefer the blunt weapon directness of the original. And I suppose that's what I like about the original Westworld, too, with - as you say - the bloody apocalypse at the end. (Though I should confess I only dipped into the HBO series, rather than watching it solidly all the way through. I liked the freewheeling comedy of the original film. I found the new one - as with most modern productions - a bit too in love with its own seriousness.)
Despite my remarks above, my wife and I actually did enjoy Season 1 and 2 of Westworld as well, before it inevitably descended into the mire of what I tried to describe.
Great video. I heartily agree with your scoring although I can't work out how I've managed to miss the great Vincent Price in Last Man on Earth. Sounds tremendous fun. I quite enjoyed the first series of Westworld but it ended up as a totally incoherent mess. I bailed after series 3. Huge missed opportunity. I caught The Omega Man when I was far too young and it scared the bejesus out of me.
If you've never seen The Amphibian Man, a Russian sci fi that at the time of its release was the highest grossing film of all time in Russia, please see it!! There is a fine print with English subs on youtube.
I am a huuuge SF fan and Carpenters The Thing is one of my all time faves. It's right up there with the original Alien movie. One night when I was about 20 me and some mates watched The Thing on video and two or three of us had to trudge across a vast empty snowy field to get back to where we could get a bus home. Did we pretend we were in the Antarctic being stalked by The Thing? hahaha What do you think? Great memories/GREAT movie. 😀
The Invasion of the Body Snatchers - I watched this original movie with my (then) teenage daughter 6 or 7 years ago. I thought she would be all ' ohhh it's black and white, boring!' and I would have to be 'just watch it and think about the story' but no, she was engrossed the whole way through and even got quite twitchy towards the end; thought she was going to duck behind the sofa at one point. She loved it in a creeped out sort of way. The problem with today's remakes, as in post 2000 and particularly recently is that they are made, not for the likes of us, but for today's typical audience. You know the type, brain the size of a peanut, attention span of a goldfish, 'oh, oh pause the film while I reply to my mate on facetube, he's just sent a picture of his whatsit!'. 'His Whatsit?' 'yeah , his whatsit, one of those cheesy snack things.' No wonder they have to explore the same ideas ad nauseam, most viewers these days will have missed it the first three times.
Ha, ha! (I love Wotsits) I'm glad she enjoyed the original, and I think that says something about its pace and economy. It stands up with modern audiences who are used to faster storytelling. I think another problem is the concerted focus on that dreaded demographic - the 16 to 25 year old. Market research has told producers they're the biggest chunk of the audience so EVERYTHING is geared (often condescendingly) towards them. Hence the remake of The Fog where adult characters are shoved aside in favour of youths partying on a boat. Grrr!
Being a baby boomer and growing up watching those Sci-fi movies of the 50s, I prefer them because of the fewer CGI effects. The remake of the Thing I didn't care for too much because of the grotesque appearances the creature created of those it was trying to imitate. I agree with you on Invasion of the Body Snatchers, the remakes weren't that good, though I liked the one with Meg Tilly. The Fly, I enjoyed the original since it followed the book so well and the ending was really sad, not so much the remake. There was an earlier remake in 1965 called The Son of the Fly -The son of the inventor of a matter-transporter, which turned him into a monster when he tried to transport himself along with a tiny housefly, continues to pursue his father's experiment, while his own two sons attempt to extricate him, themselves and the family name from further disaster and scandal. Not so bad, but still fewer special effects. I Am Legend with Will Smith could have been better had they not made the creatures fast, almost indestructible zombies. It didn't follow the book well, so my #1 is Last Man on Earth with Vincent Price, even though it deviates from the book. #2 is The Omega Man, here he is in a large city whereas in the book he is on the outskirts of a city. For me, the original Blob is the best, the remake isn't as good. Why didn't you include The Day the Earth Stood Still? The original has Michael Rennie as Klatu guest starring Patricia Neal The remake with Keanu Reeves wasn't that good, it had him coming to destroy humanity because we were destroying the planet and there few Earth-type planets in the galaxy. There was John Cleese who took up the role that Sam Jaffe played in the original and the book had an unexpected ending. "Farewell to the Master" by Harry Bates Thanks for a good video, you have a new subscriber.
Thanks, Isaac, and welcome along! I didn't include Day The Earth Stood Still because I don't think the remake has any cult value, really. It seemed to disappear without trace. With the other films here, I think the remake has got a comparable cult value to the original. I love the original Day, though. Still one of the best sci-fi films to come out of Hollywood.
@@michaelbartlettfilm The War of the World's was great too, didn't care for the one with Tom Cruise though the Tripods were good. C. Thomas Howel was in one and not bad, though there were 6 legged pods there. The latest - the War of the Worlds Attack was good and took place in Britain.
@@55Quirll I thought the effects in the Spielberg one were very impressive. It started OK, but lost its way towards the end. (As for tripods, did you ever see The Tripods, the BBC series from the 80s? They had one large metal leg that they used in all the location shots! Very sweet.)
@@michaelbartlettfilm Yes, it was based on a Young Adult Trilogy by John Cristopher Tripods Trilogy (The White Mountains / The City of Gold and Lead / The Pool of Fire). Unfortunately, they only did the first two and never did the final one, I enjoyed them. Another good one was The Land that Time Forgot Trilogy by Edgar Rice Burroughs - The first two had Doug McClure, they didn't do the final one though. In 2009 there was the remake with C. Thomas Howell which had more to do with the Bermuda Triangle than a lost continent. I prefer the books myself though the film with Doug McClure was pretty close to the book though the Dinosaurs were pretty lame. Can't think of any others at the moment.
Ha, ha! I had a chuckle to myself when I spotted this during the premiere, hoping no-one would notice. Will Self would love being the last man ever! Imagine how much he'd enjoy hating the vampires. Except he'd have no-one to listen to him crapping on.
When I first heard the title "Crimes of the Future," I assumed it was predicting the remake of "The Fog." Only Cronenberg could dare to hold such a monstrosity accountable. But seriously, so many of the '50's sci-fi films, although groundbreaking for the time, are too cheesy to engage me thoroughly (although I do actually prefer "rubber suits" to CGI in almost every case, if I have to pick). Having said that, when a '50's sci-fi did transcend what was typical (as Invasion of the Body Snatchers did)...it must be put on an even higher pedestal. For me, '50's sci-fi was usually better when it dared to utilize fewer effects, at least until practical effects techniques really took off in the later '70's. It was the concepts that were original and interesting...and the smart filmmakers, I think, wisely chose to focus on flushing the concept out with words over effects. But your points about modern industry proclivities that tease concepts out "ad nauseum" are, I believe, the result of laziness over ingenuity, especially in an era when risk is not rewarded. And so it certainly seems the current crop are all too happy to milk rehashed properties dry.
The last sci-fi film I thought was worth a dime was Ad Astra. But it didn't seem to connect with audiences over here. Ex Machina was good, too. But after that... Blimey, I'm going all the way back to Gattaca in the 90s!
@@michaelbartlettfilm Loved Gattaca! Ad Astra and Ex Machina were both worth eleven cents (one over a dime...). One from the '90's I think is underrated is "The Arrival" with Charlie Sheen.
@@michaelbartlettfilm It's a sci-fi that plays out like a mystery with an "environmental" message, but at least it tried to do something different with some of its proverbial tropes. Plus it has the amazing Ron Silver as the bad guy.
To say there's no extra gain in developing those themes in Westworld is not entirely true. It's called cash and is the main problem with 21st Century consumerism's relationship with the Arts. The era of the spin-off, the tie-in, the monthly subscription, the phone contract, and making one-off purchases/experiences a thing of the past. You're spot on. Its not clever. It is deeply cynical, though.
Yeah, sad but true. I was visiting family this weekend, channel hopping, and it was such a pleasure to come across such simple faves like Predator or Ray Harryhausen's Mysterious Island, with their sense of wonder and fun. Nowadays they'd be made into a 22-part series with "complex" relationships "fleshed out" over the episodes ("and then they take an interesting direction in season two which we're binge-watching at the m..." Oh, whatever.)
You're absolutely wrong about the remake of the Blob. It is a really good movie and superior in every respect to the original. For the other movies I generally agree with you. 😊
@@michaelbartlettfilm I just can't get over McQueen playing a 17 year old. And if that wasn't enough to take me out of the movie there's the awful theme music. How could anybody hear that and say: 'yeah, that's very suitable for a horror movie'. 🤭 Too slow as well for my taste. But I keep rambling on. If you like the movie, that's perfectly fine. 🙂
@@michaelbartlettfilm I would also prefer the Blob remake, if me and Steve McQueen didn't share a hometown (Beech Grove, Indiana). Wait, actually, I'll still take the remake anyways...Beech Grove isn't what it used to be.
Michael Crichton became rather good at recycling his concept in Westworld and reconfiguring Westworld's central story and replacing the cowboys for Dino's in his rather lazy Jurassic Park book that went on to sell zillions of copies, and make Crichton a near billionaire. I must be the only one on here who actually remembers the short-lived and rather one-dimensional MGM TV series based on Westworld. That early 1980s series was boring and completely forgettable. I had far more fun with the spin-off MGM series to Logan's Run, that's if you try and forget the original MGM film of Logan's Run ever existed
For the love of all that is sacred!... How dare you talk about 1958's "The Fly" with such carelessness, and on top of that call it a "silly little sci-fi movie", "a bit of fun", sorry but you are dead wrong on this one; certainly David Cronenberg is a great Director; I, like any other cinema connoisseur, love his work but I'm afraid he fell short with his version of "The Fly", his is the silly, simple and empty one, silly dialogue, silly make-up, silly acting, gratuitus characters and relationships. I think you are failing to see the true depth, the truly moving and horrifying situation, Kurt Neumann's version masterfully places on the screen; it is dark, macabre, and truly disturbing even by today's standards. 1958 "The Fly" is a masterpiece of horror and a far superior film than Cronenberg's remake. Cheers Mike!
The Fly is my favorite Cronenberg and my favorite "body horror" even above the Thing. It just hits the perfect blend of ridiculous, disgusting, fun, uncannily creepy, campy, and artistic to be the perfect 80s horror movie. On the topic of remakes, I absolutely adore both the Murnau, and especially the Herzog almost shot for shot remake of Nosferatu. Such great films
Agreed, the Murnau film is incredible. It's been a while since I watched Herzog's version, but I remember it didn't have the same impact because I couldn't stop comparing it with the original!
@@michaelbartlettfilm Herzog is my favorite director and I saw that one first so I had the experience of comparing the 1922 version to his, which held up considering its 100 year age
Yikes! How did I miss this video when it dropped? As soon as you mentioned "I am Legend", I was getting ready to put you right with the Vincent Price version. Should have trusted you! Though I do also like "The Omega Man" - I have a soft spot for Charlton Heston's 1970s spate of SF films.
The Vincent Price one is fab, isn't it? I like the Charlton Heston films too, but they get cheesier the older they get!
I've always loved the original "The Fly". I saw it in a theatrical revival in 1991 or 1992 and they had a CinemaScope print with the 4-track magnetic stereo audio; what an absolute joy that was to experience. My Blu Ray fits the bill quite well. The Blob is one of those films everyone seems to love but which I find lackluster in some ways. I do like it , but I feel it's overrated. I do enjoy the remake; it's off its head gory but kind of fun its over the top way. "Westworld" from 1973 is a very enjoyable film for me; it has no fat on its slim, 89 minute run time and it just flies by as a rather dated but fond piece of nostalgia.
I prefer the black and white old version of Village of The Damned. Those posh nice kids with the freaky eyes are still scary.
The TV series that was made I didn't care for since it didn't follow as well as the book or the original with George Sanders.
There's about a two-decade span of the earlier era (stretching from the early Fifties to the early Seventies) being pitted against the latter era, which complicates my thesis that, apart from a handful of exceptions, such as 'Aelita' and 'Metropolis' from the silent years, science fiction cinema experienced a quantum leap beginning in the Sixties. This advancement in merit lies primarily in a greater sophistication in the philosophical issues being addressed, and also more nuanced aesthetic strategies by which to shape and convey those stories and themes. One wouldn't necessarily glean this from looking solely at later remakes of pre-Sixties efforts, the charm of the latter often springing from their datedness and appeals to nostalgia. The remakes might be more technically adroit, but frequently are not as much fun as the originals.
In one aspect, the later iterations of 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' are superior to the original, and this is that the alien entities in the later versions are more truly affectless, void of emotion, than the replacements in the first film. This affectlessness makes the invaders more menacing, and makes the situation the human characters confront feel more dire. Generally, though, Siegel's first version is the more memorable effort.
I've never seen the remake of 'The Blob', but I did want to observe that the late-night horror screening featured so prominently in the 1958 original could be seen as the prototype of a midnight-movie presentation, the first screen depiction of cult behavior in relation to films and filmgoing.
I'm actually a fan of the first couple of seasons of the HBO series 'Westworld', and find it more compelling than the original 1973 film (not to mention the 1976 sequel 'Futureworld'). The cable series admittedly did go on too long, and some story threads needlessly dragged out almost to the point of incoherence, with the altercations between Dolores and Maeve becoming repetitive and predictable. But observe the dazzling temporal leaps the writing and editing make in those first couple of seasons, and the momentous transformations several characters experience as the narrative develops. Though it might seem hyperbolic, I think the temporal dislocations in story and editing are worthy of an Alain Resnais film. One area where I do think the 1973 film is more effective is in the breakdown of the androids (more of a rebellion in the HBO series), the surprise and violence more frightening and unpredictable. In the TV series, this part of the story feels more like a serious glitch for a company swiftly moving in for damage control, while in the original film, the crisis registers as a more existential dilemma, the disaster seeming akin to the end of the world.
Thanks, Barry. Once again, this is so much better argued than my daft little video, ha, ha! 2001: A Space Odyssey influenced sci-fi films for a good decade after its release, and that era was the high-water mark for those people into literary sci-fi who wanted cinema to match it in terms of sophistication (though Omega Man got through somehow!) Then Star Wars turned producers onto space opera and Alien helped reintroduce sci-fi horror, both strains running concurrently through the early to mid-eighties. Kaufman's Body Snatchers remake got in there just before the tide turned, and it's a fantastic movie, but I prefer the blunt weapon directness of the original. And I suppose that's what I like about the original Westworld, too, with - as you say - the bloody apocalypse at the end. (Though I should confess I only dipped into the HBO series, rather than watching it solidly all the way through. I liked the freewheeling comedy of the original film. I found the new one - as with most modern productions - a bit too in love with its own seriousness.)
Despite my remarks above, my wife and I actually did enjoy Season 1 and 2 of Westworld as well, before it inevitably descended into the mire of what I tried to describe.
Great video.
I heartily agree with your scoring although I can't work out how I've managed to miss the great Vincent Price in Last Man on Earth. Sounds tremendous fun.
I quite enjoyed the first series of Westworld but it ended up as a totally incoherent mess. I bailed after series 3. Huge missed opportunity.
I caught The Omega Man when I was far too young and it scared the bejesus out of me.
Last Man on Earth is aces! You'll love it. And I think the Blu Ray has just been released.
Your bang on with your Westworld rant !👍👍👍🎥
If you've never seen The Amphibian Man, a Russian sci fi that at the time of its release was the highest grossing film of all time in Russia, please see it!! There is a fine print with English subs on youtube.
I'll check it out! Talking of Russian amphibians, the BBC series The Nightmare Man from the early 80s is great fun, too.
I am a huuuge SF fan and Carpenters The Thing is one of my all time faves. It's right up there with the original Alien movie. One night when I was about 20 me and some mates watched The Thing on video and two or three of us had to trudge across a vast empty snowy field to get back to where we could get a bus home. Did we pretend we were in the Antarctic being stalked by The Thing? hahaha What do you think? Great memories/GREAT movie. 😀
I also have good memories of watching The Thing with mates at that exact age! Though we only had to trudge back across Leeds at the end.
Btw we need a best 60 s sci fi list !???!!! 😅👍🎥
The Invasion of the Body Snatchers - I watched this original movie with my (then) teenage daughter 6 or 7 years ago. I thought she would be all ' ohhh it's black and white, boring!' and I would have to be 'just watch it and think about the story' but no, she was engrossed the whole way through and even got quite twitchy towards the end; thought she was going to duck behind the sofa at one point. She loved it in a creeped out sort of way.
The problem with today's remakes, as in post 2000 and particularly recently is that they are made, not for the likes of us, but for today's typical audience. You know the type, brain the size of a peanut, attention span of a goldfish, 'oh, oh pause the film while I reply to my mate on facetube, he's just sent a picture of his whatsit!'. 'His Whatsit?' 'yeah , his whatsit, one of those cheesy snack things.' No wonder they have to explore the same ideas ad nauseam, most viewers these days will have missed it the first three times.
Ha, ha! (I love Wotsits) I'm glad she enjoyed the original, and I think that says something about its pace and economy. It stands up with modern audiences who are used to faster storytelling. I think another problem is the concerted focus on that dreaded demographic - the 16 to 25 year old. Market research has told producers they're the biggest chunk of the audience so EVERYTHING is geared (often condescendingly) towards them. Hence the remake of The Fog where adult characters are shoved aside in favour of youths partying on a boat. Grrr!
Being a baby boomer and growing up watching those Sci-fi movies of the 50s, I prefer them because of the fewer CGI effects. The remake of the Thing I didn't care for too much because of the grotesque appearances the creature created of those it was trying to imitate. I agree with you on Invasion of the Body Snatchers, the remakes weren't that good, though I liked the one with Meg Tilly.
The Fly, I enjoyed the original since it followed the book so well and the ending was really sad, not so much the remake. There was an earlier remake in 1965 called The Son of the Fly -The son of the inventor of a matter-transporter, which turned him into a monster when he tried to transport himself along with a tiny housefly, continues to pursue his father's experiment, while his own two sons attempt to extricate him, themselves and the family name from further disaster and scandal. Not so bad, but still fewer special effects.
I Am Legend with Will Smith could have been better had they not made the creatures fast, almost indestructible zombies. It didn't follow the book well, so my #1 is Last Man on Earth with Vincent Price, even though it deviates from the book. #2 is The Omega Man, here he is in a large city whereas in the book he is on the outskirts of a city.
For me, the original Blob is the best, the remake isn't as good.
Why didn't you include The Day the Earth Stood Still? The original has Michael Rennie as Klatu guest starring Patricia Neal
The remake with Keanu Reeves wasn't that good, it had him coming to destroy humanity because we were destroying the planet and there few Earth-type planets in the galaxy. There was John Cleese who took up the role that Sam Jaffe played in the original and the book had an unexpected ending. "Farewell to the Master" by Harry Bates
Thanks for a good video, you have a new subscriber.
Thanks, Isaac, and welcome along! I didn't include Day The Earth Stood Still because I don't think the remake has any cult value, really. It seemed to disappear without trace. With the other films here, I think the remake has got a comparable cult value to the original. I love the original Day, though. Still one of the best sci-fi films to come out of Hollywood.
@@michaelbartlettfilm The War of the World's was great too, didn't care for the one with Tom Cruise though the Tripods were good. C. Thomas Howel was in one and not bad, though there were 6 legged pods there. The latest - the War of the Worlds Attack was good and took place in Britain.
@@55Quirll I thought the effects in the Spielberg one were very impressive. It started OK, but lost its way towards the end. (As for tripods, did you ever see The Tripods, the BBC series from the 80s? They had one large metal leg that they used in all the location shots! Very sweet.)
@@michaelbartlettfilm Yes, it was based on a Young Adult Trilogy by John Cristopher Tripods Trilogy (The White Mountains / The City of Gold and Lead / The Pool of Fire). Unfortunately, they only did the first two and never did the final one, I enjoyed them.
Another good one was The Land that Time Forgot Trilogy by Edgar Rice Burroughs - The first two had Doug McClure, they didn't do the final one though. In 2009 there was the remake with C. Thomas Howell which had more to do with the Bermuda Triangle than a lost continent. I prefer the books myself though the film with Doug McClure was pretty close to the book though the Dinosaurs were pretty lame. Can't think of any others at the moment.
@@55Quirll The Land That Time Forgot had Caroline Munro in, so it's obviously an extremely important piece of cinematographic art. Or something.
12:50 - 'I am Legend' starring Will Self, someone needs to make this happen!
Ha, ha! I had a chuckle to myself when I spotted this during the premiere, hoping no-one would notice. Will Self would love being the last man ever! Imagine how much he'd enjoy hating the vampires. Except he'd have no-one to listen to him crapping on.
@@michaelbartlettfilm I think it has sitcom potential
Go far to say John carpenterd remake of the thing is the greatest remake , it's a masterpiece 🎥
Spot on!
When I first heard the title "Crimes of the Future," I assumed it was predicting the remake of "The Fog." Only Cronenberg could dare to hold such a monstrosity accountable. But seriously, so many of the '50's sci-fi films, although groundbreaking for the time, are too cheesy to engage me thoroughly (although I do actually prefer "rubber suits" to CGI in almost every case, if I have to pick). Having said that, when a '50's sci-fi did transcend what was typical (as Invasion of the Body Snatchers did)...it must be put on an even higher pedestal. For me, '50's sci-fi was usually better when it dared to utilize fewer effects, at least until practical effects techniques really took off in the later '70's. It was the concepts that were original and interesting...and the smart filmmakers, I think, wisely chose to focus on flushing the concept out with words over effects. But your points about modern industry proclivities that tease concepts out "ad nauseum" are, I believe, the result of laziness over ingenuity, especially in an era when risk is not rewarded. And so it certainly seems the current crop are all too happy to milk rehashed properties dry.
The last sci-fi film I thought was worth a dime was Ad Astra. But it didn't seem to connect with audiences over here. Ex Machina was good, too. But after that... Blimey, I'm going all the way back to Gattaca in the 90s!
@@michaelbartlettfilm Loved Gattaca! Ad Astra and Ex Machina were both worth eleven cents (one over a dime...). One from the '90's I think is underrated is "The Arrival" with Charlie Sheen.
@@frankb821 Charlie Sheen! I'd forgotten about him. I'll check it out.
@@michaelbartlettfilm It's a sci-fi that plays out like a mystery with an "environmental" message, but at least it tried to do something different with some of its proverbial tropes. Plus it has the amazing Ron Silver as the bad guy.
To say there's no extra gain in developing those themes in Westworld is not entirely true. It's called cash and is the main problem with 21st Century consumerism's relationship with the Arts. The era of the spin-off, the tie-in, the monthly subscription, the phone contract, and making one-off purchases/experiences a thing of the past. You're spot on. Its not clever. It is deeply cynical, though.
Yeah, sad but true. I was visiting family this weekend, channel hopping, and it was such a pleasure to come across such simple faves like Predator or Ray Harryhausen's Mysterious Island, with their sense of wonder and fun. Nowadays they'd be made into a 22-part series with "complex" relationships "fleshed out" over the episodes ("and then they take an interesting direction in season two which we're binge-watching at the m..." Oh, whatever.)
You're absolutely wrong about the remake of the Blob. It is a really good movie and superior in every respect to the original. For the other movies I generally agree with you. 😊
Fair enough. I admit I like the 50s-ness of the original, maybe that's why I put it top.
@@michaelbartlettfilm I just can't get over McQueen playing a 17 year old. And if that wasn't enough to take me out of the movie there's the awful theme music. How could anybody hear that and say: 'yeah, that's very suitable for a horror movie'. 🤭 Too slow as well for my taste. But I keep rambling on. If you like the movie, that's perfectly fine. 🙂
@@wouterl5316 I've just discovered the British press call Boris Johnson (or BoJo) "the Blob!" I mean, it could have been a whole different movie!
@@michaelbartlettfilm lol. Imagine that.
@@michaelbartlettfilm I would also prefer the Blob remake, if me and Steve McQueen didn't share a hometown (Beech Grove, Indiana). Wait, actually, I'll still take the remake anyways...Beech Grove isn't what it used to be.
Michael Crichton became rather good at recycling his concept in Westworld and reconfiguring Westworld's central story and replacing the cowboys for Dino's in his rather lazy Jurassic Park book that went on to sell zillions of copies, and make Crichton a near billionaire. I must be the only one on here who actually remembers the short-lived and rather one-dimensional MGM TV series based on Westworld. That early 1980s series was boring and completely forgettable. I had far more fun with the spin-off MGM series to Logan's Run, that's if you try and forget the original MGM film of Logan's Run ever existed
I vaguely remember the TV Logan's Run but had no idea about the MGM Westworld! Lazy is a good word for Jurassic Park.
@michaelbartlettfilm Beyond Westworld, it was called.
For the love of all that is sacred!... How dare you talk about 1958's "The Fly" with such carelessness, and on top of that call it a "silly little sci-fi movie", "a bit of fun", sorry but you are dead wrong on this one; certainly David Cronenberg is a great Director; I, like any other cinema connoisseur, love his work but I'm afraid he fell short with his version of "The Fly", his is the silly, simple and empty one, silly dialogue, silly make-up, silly acting, gratuitus characters and relationships. I think you are failing to see the true depth, the truly moving and horrifying situation, Kurt Neumann's version masterfully places on the screen; it is dark, macabre, and truly disturbing even by today's standards. 1958 "The Fly" is a masterpiece of horror and a far superior film than Cronenberg's remake. Cheers Mike!
Ha, ha, for a minute there, I thought you were serious! 😉
@@michaelbartlettfilm Dead serious about my appreciation of both films; serious about the whole thing...? Nah. Keep up the excellent work mate. 🙂